통상공동소송인의 변론에 관한 연구 (A Study on Pleading of commonness litigant in the normal joint action)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한양법학회
· 수록지 정보 : 한양법학 / 31호 / 137 ~ 164페이지
· 저자명 : 최성호

초록

From normal joint action according to principle of commonness litigant independence the possibility of affecting is not to the joint litigant where the assertion or evidence submission of joint litigant one side is different, but in order to correspond in gist of joint action, if applies the principle of assertion commonness or the principle of evidence commonness in the joint litigant between, principle of commonness litigant independence and about the yes or no which collides with afterwords became early in same conclusion.
First, regarding the principle of evidence commonness between of the joint litigant, in the joint litigant will affect in the joint litigant where the act of evidence application etc. of one person is different and being handled with act of the different joint litigant will not be the fact that the problem which opposes in principle of commonness litigant independence does not occur, principle of evidence commonness the law officer the person concerned will have what kind of hope to the expectation and submit an evidence, relationship without did not submit the resultant evidence where the person euro judges the objective value of that evidence and in the joint litigant who is different only will only do in resultantly affecting in selfishness, joint litigant each one Any restriction without the assertion which is confisry or an evidence application exercises the lawsuit accomplishment circle which is active from the different joint action person and or if the different joint litigant and does and is effective means principle of commonness litigant independence and existing with difference, the trade name the problem of contradiction or collision knows as assertion should have been boiled.
Second, regarding the principle of assertion commonness between of the joint litigant, “concept of indirect assertion” leads and the joint litigant separates in oneself and the case where becomes the profit the different joint litigant the different joint litigant directness is made to send the protest of the assertion which is indirect and, the collision of argument attention principle and avoids, also about reduction even to is a relationship of the lawsuit which one is identical in the argument which differs in between the joint litigant and that to between the joint litigants each other will be able to solve the problem which reaches to the conclusion which has become contradiction, asserts the fact which asserts with mediation.

영어초록

From normal joint action according to principle of commonness litigant independence the possibility of affecting is not to the joint litigant where the assertion or evidence submission of joint litigant one side is different, but in order to correspond in gist of joint action, if applies the principle of assertion commonness or the principle of evidence commonness in the joint litigant between, principle of commonness litigant independence and about the yes or no which collides with afterwords became early in same conclusion.
First, regarding the principle of evidence commonness between of the joint litigant, in the joint litigant will affect in the joint litigant where the act of evidence application etc. of one person is different and being handled with act of the different joint litigant will not be the fact that the problem which opposes in principle of commonness litigant independence does not occur, principle of evidence commonness the law officer the person concerned will have what kind of hope to the expectation and submit an evidence, relationship without did not submit the resultant evidence where the person euro judges the objective value of that evidence and in the joint litigant who is different only will only do in resultantly affecting in selfishness, joint litigant each one Any restriction without the assertion which is confisry or an evidence application exercises the lawsuit accomplishment circle which is active from the different joint action person and or if the different joint litigant and does and is effective means principle of commonness litigant independence and existing with difference, the trade name the problem of contradiction or collision knows as assertion should have been boiled.
Second, regarding the principle of assertion commonness between of the joint litigant, “concept of indirect assertion” leads and the joint litigant separates in oneself and the case where becomes the profit the different joint litigant the different joint litigant directness is made to send the protest of the assertion which is indirect and, the collision of argument attention principle and avoids, also about reduction even to is a relationship of the lawsuit which one is identical in the argument which differs in between the joint litigant and that to between the joint litigants each other will be able to solve the problem which reaches to the conclusion which has become contradiction, asserts the fact which asserts with mediation.

참고자료

· 없음